LkShoreGirl1

Have you not been watching the Roosevelt Park real estate situation? It's no different from the rest of the Muskegon area. Maybe your street doesn't have renters in several houses, but if you call a realtor or check the listings for all of RP you can see the falling house prices and find out exactly how many sales are short sales, and how many are repossessions. There are areas of RP that DO have vacant houses, repos, and empty rentals.

1) Why should Michigan be far, far behind the curve on this one? Most other states ban smoking in bars. A few years ago I spent some time living in a non-smoking state and what I joy it was to be able to patronize any business and not worry about respiratory consequences.

2) Just because business is down, that doesn't mean it's because of the smoking ban. It's probably because of the economy.

3) Why should anyone be forced to breathe in the toxic, carcinogenic chemicals of another person's smoking? It's not optional for the workers, because it might be the only job they can get. It's not optional for other patrons, especially in restaurants because the smoke always drifts into the non-smoking section. Your rights end where mine begin. If, for instance, you want to tattoo dragons on your face and stand next to me, that doesn't harm me. But if you smoke, that does harm me. It can give me cancer. It can cause me bronchitis.

4) We as a society should be encouraging people to quit smoking and to not start smoking, because of the destructive effects to both individuals and society as a whole (in healthcare and lost productivity costs) One way to do that is ban smoking in public places.

I also hope the new chief has success in handling the mess that is the former Lakecrest Apartments. I lived there ten years ago and I had to call the police myself when I heard a screaming woman beg someone to do that. It was a horrible place then, and it's apparently gotten worse, and renter friends tell me they felt forced to leave Tiffany Woods because it's getting really bad, too, my source said they're taking Section 8 there now. When people don't pay for their own housing, they have no reason to act responsibly about it.

If the city could just find a way to SHUT DOWN Lakecrest, RP would become a much better place for families to live.

Additionally, the wave of foreclosures has caused there to be quite a few empty houses and increased the stock of rentals in RP, which makes for poorer, more transient residents. There are certainly challenges for the RP police. Let's hope they can find a way to deal with the mess at Lakecrest and growing mess at Tiffany Woods in a way that allows them to also serve the needs of the larger community.

The location is fine, the question is if Muskegon can support a brewpub in that location. Isn't that very close to Tipsy Toad and Raquets? The MAC is closed, the City Cafe location has closed a couple of times, although I hear that the new Indian restaurant on Third Street has opened to good crowds. It's a "time will tell" thing, perhaps.

Steve, if you want a refund and you're not currently getting one, you need to ask your employer to withhold more. That's a very simple procedure.

Also, why do you want to make the tax structure different for a person with one $40,000 per year job and a person with two $20,000 per year jobs? They're both making the same amount of money, they should both pay the same amount of tax. Why do you want to give the person with two jobs a tax break that is not available to the person with one job?

I am completely lost with your logic. If you have one $45,000 job and one $20,000 job, you should pay EXACTLY the SAME tax as a person with one $65,000 job. It's the same amount of money. Why do you want to make a distinction? It makes zero sense.

I know, WarER, it would just be nice for people to be able to be able to get help without having to have a religion pushed at them, one which they may not want. I'm pretty sure that Catholic Charities doesn't preach Roman Catholic Christianity at those they help. They just help. (No, I'm not Roman Catholic.)

Jesus said to help people, he didn't say "Help people and force your version of religion on them." He DID say, "The poor will always be with you." I read that as instructions to help people assuming it's a never-ending assignment.

Poverty isn't about a person's faith or lack of it, and conversion to a certain interpretation of Christianity (there are, of course, many interpretations) isn't the bottom-line solution.

The trouble with the Rescue Mission is the assumption that people who are homeless are in that situation because they are abusing drugs or alcohol or have otherwise made some kind of an intentional choice that they need to "repent" and "find Jesus" from in order to solve their housing problems.

I know someone who had to stay at the Rescue Mission for a time, and he found it degrading because he was treated like a wayward sinner in need of repentance. His problem, like that of so many homeless people, was NOT substance abuse but a combination of emotional, mental, and physical issues that caused him to end up in that cycle of no money, no housing, no job, no money, etc. This guy did NOT need "Jesus". He needed the services of CMH. He didn't need to be watched for drugs and held responsible for the infractions of OTHER guys at the mission.

This Rescue Mission is about the glory of the Rescue Mission and converting these people to their religion. Their help is based on your willingness to pretend to get saved for Jesus.

And not just any minimum-wage job, one that requires hours of hard, back-breaking labor. I've done farm work, when I was a teenager. Nobody over a certain age or without a certain amount of physical strength can do it. I stand in awe of those who can, and I think we need to allow non-citizen guest workers access to these jobs. (read: migrants who originate in Mexico and points south.) These jobs are not going to rescue the economy in West Michigan because only a few people can actually do this work, it's temporary, and it pays so little.

Yeah, I read that piece where Mr. Gunn admitted to all the world that he doesn't have a decent savings account and lives paycheck to paycheck. He was right about the annoyance of the bill collectors, but I find it pretty funny that he's another one of those people who believes the people on Bridge Cards are the problem when there he is, one car repair from a Bridge Card himself because he doesn't believe in a savings account, duh, or perhaps because he's one of those lower-income people who vote AGAINST their own best interests by voting Republican because they, sorry to say, don't have a proper grasp on the issues due to either lack of appropriate education or adherence to what they believe is a more "patriotic" ideology. I'm no apologist for President Obama, but there is not a chance on earth that I'd vote for any of the Republicans. Look what they've done to this country. If given free reign, they will drive an even bigger wedge between the "haves" and "have-nots" and they will use PEOPLE LIKE MR. GUNN to do it-- those who are teetering on the brink of the "have-not" category but are blind to the real reasons they are there.

I wouldn't let this guy roll up the pennies in my piggy bank. What is Waddell & Reed thinking? Hiring this guy is like announcing "We have incompetent employees! Let us have our incompetent employees advise you about how to handle your investments! They work for us because they failed miserably doing that at their last job!"

You're broad-brushing. A lot of jobs go unfilled because they are skilled jobs and employers don't want to hire someone who needs training. For every lazy person mooching off of a parent or a girlfriend or the government, there are a lot of people who would be happy to have work and are struggling with unemployment. You can't lump every unemployed person into a single "lazy" category.

It's nice that you've found some anecdotal stories to support your political view. We all can. For every lazy person you can find, I can find one desperately sending out hundreds of resumes and getting no offers.

And "liberals" don't want to "soak the rich". The rich need to be accountable to pay their fair share. Right now they're paying less than ever because they are supposedly "job creators" but they aren't creating jobs. They're investing in global mutual funds, because that where the returns are, and that creates jobs overseas. And, of course, with no consumer demand, there is no reason to "create jobs." If the consumers are un- or under-employed, no demand. Econ 101.

No mention of the passengers who found themselves stranded last year when the Lake Express broke down. Not everyone travels with their car, and last year there were those with round-trip tickets who found themselves stuck for a week.

If you don't maintain a building, it falls to ruin. This church is one of those buildings that are architecturally important to Muskegon's history. If they don't maintinain it, who will? Does Metaljunkie want all the buildings downtown to fall to ruin and make Muskegon an even more blighted place than it is? I think the Occidental Hotel used to be across the street from this church, and people are still mourning it's demolition. It's either fix it or lose it!

Hey, Metaljunkie, the next time your house needs a new roof, will you deem it a waste of money and let the rain pour in and ruin your house?

Good job on the piece, Megan. It's very helpful, to me, to read something that's reported "as is" without editorial comment, but with enough content and direct quotes to make what's going on clear.

Now for the commentary: Muskegon Heights may be a large employer of minorities, but it's also a school system with a majority of African-American students. Those children and their FUTURES must come FIRST before bankrupting the district to save the jobs of a few minority employees. These kids are suffering with the worst education in the state of Michigan, and it doesn't matter if they are sent to Muskegon or Shores or Oakridge or WHEREVER next year, they won't be able to keep up at their grade level because they have been the sacrificial lambs to the greed and cowardice of the administration.

"People often walk in the street or on the grass in that area of Norton, Chandler said."

This is quite true. For some students, Norton Avenue is on their walking route to school. Putting the kids in the street, especially in the winter, is extraordinarily dangerous.

Roosevelt Park plows their sidewalks, too. This ensures an open, much safer route for all pedestrians. Even if there were sidewalks in Norton Shores, which there are very few, it's impossible to rely on property owners to keep them clear.

Why isn't the reviewer named? The identity of the reviewer is important. If there is no reviewer named, the posted information could also be taken from a press release and not written by someone who actually attended.

Again, the Chronicle steps down yet ANOTHER notch. No named reviewer = no credibility.

I disagree, because it's none of anyone's business whom a person sleeps with. People have a right to disagree with any general principle or lifestyle, freedom of speech applies, certainly, but all individuals have the right to whatever sexuality (assuming consenting adults) with nobody else having a say. it's none of their business.

People need to worry only about themselves and their own sexuality. If they don't approve of homosexuality, then they shouldn't have sex with a same-sex partner. Otherwise they should keep their noses out of other people's private lives. This also applies to gay people who don't like Cynthia Nixon's apparent bisexuality, which allows her to choose between gay and straight. It's none of their business, either.